THE SAME PAGE
STRATAGY
MIKE
CUNNINGHAM
February 10,
2008
I don’t know about you folks, but I can
certainly understand why savvy
1
Peter 3:14-16 (ESV) 14
But
even if you should suffer for righteousness' sake, you will be blessed. Have no
fear of them, nor be troubled, 15 but in your hearts regard Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a
defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; 16 yet do it with
gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are
slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.
There are several things we must keep in mind
whenever we find ourselves in this kind of a discussion about evolution with a
skeptical atheist evolutionist. (1) Ephesians
6:12 (ESV) 12 “For we do not wrestle
against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities,
against the cosmic powers over this present darkness, against the spiritual
forces of evil in the heavenly places.” Like all human beings, non-Christians
to a greater or lesser degree, are also subjected to an unrelenting demonic
influence. And we must train ourselves to constantly remember that reality. (2)
Every human being
already has an opinion about how our world works, and they are convinced it is correct. Who of us don’t
enter into a conversation convinced that what we already believe about the
world is “the truth”? Whether
we want to admit it or not you and I and everyone else are biased; it
behooves us not to forget the fact that no one is neutral.
(3) Don’t be
argumentative. For instance, there are sincere Christians who are convinced
that unless a person
doesn’t believe in a literal six day time frame in which God created His world,
then that person can’t possibility be a Christian, but nothing could be
further from the truth. (4) We must also train ourselves to listen,
listen and keep on listening! We must try to discern where the other person is
coming from. For instance, when
someone who believes in the “Theory” of Evolution says evolution isn’t
something scientists are unsure of, but rather something they are convinced
is a scientific fact; do you know what he or she really means? Are you
sure?
“According to Funk
& Wagnall’s dictionary, the word theory has a couple of alternative
definitions: (1) “A speculative or conjectural view of something; (2)
“Fundamental principals underlying a science, art, etc.: music theory, theory
of equation’s.” “It is this second usage that scientists intend when they talk
about evolutionary theory, just as when they mention gravitational theory or
the germ theory of infectious disease. In this context, the word “theory” is not intended to
convey uncertainty; for that purpose a scientist would use the word “hypothesis.”[i]
If we let that reality sink in we will both be on the same page. From there
we can proceed with a positive attitude of: “Come; let’s reason together,” (Isaiah
1:18).
At this point in the
discussion I wouldn’t attempt to waltz the non-Christian evolutionist through
the Bible in an attempt to prove why he or she is wrong and I’m right. To do so
would knock the person right off the page we have them on, and we want to keep
them there. Think about it; if someone doesn’t believe in Creation how can we expect them to seriously
consider anything supposedly Authored by the Creator? That person has their own
preconceived opinion of what constitutes truth. And they are convinced Bible
believers are scientifically illiterate pathetic fools. Remember the page
they’re on, and stay on it with them.
1
Corinthians 2:14 (AMP) 14 But the natural,
nonspiritual man does not accept or welcome or admit into his
heart the gifts and teachings and revelations of the Spirit of
God, for they are folly (meaningless nonsense) to him; and he
is incapable of knowing them [of progressively recognizing, understanding, and
becoming better acquainted with them] because
they are spiritually discerned and
estimated and appreciated.
Ephesians 4:18 (AMP) 18 Their moral understanding is darkened and their reasoning is beclouded.
[They are] alienated (estranged, self-banished) from the life of God [with no
share in it; this is] because of the ignorance (the want of knowledge and
perception, the willful blindness) that is deep-seated in them, due to their hardness
of heart [to the insensitiveness of their moral nature].
So don’t argue with them! You will only drive them away. And, stay on the same page they are on.
2 Timothy 2:23-25 (AMP) 23 But refuse (shut your mind against,
have nothing to do with) trifling (ill-informed, unedifying, stupid)
controversies over ignorant questionings, for you know that they foster strife and breed quarrels. 24 And the servant
of the Lord must not be quarrelsome (fighting and contending). Instead, he must
be kindly to everyone and
mild-tempered [preserving the bond of peace]; he must be a skilled and suitable teacher, patient and forbearing and willing to suffer wrong. 25 He must correct
his opponents with courtesy and
gentleness, in the hope that God may grant that they will repent and come to
know the Truth [that they will perceive and recognize and become accurately
acquainted with and acknowledge it],
If it were me; I
would give the non-Christian evolutionist the American Heritage dictionary
definition of the word Evolution:
“The theory that groups of organisms change with the passage of time, mainly as
the result of natural selection, so that the descendents differ morphologically
and physiologically from their ancestors.” From there I would proceed to my
understanding of the term Natural Selection;
which, according to the same dictionary is defined as: “The process in nature
by which only the organisms best adapted to their environment tend to survive
and transmit their genetic characters to succeeding generations.” This is also sometimes referred
to as being “the survival of the
fittest.”
At this point we
should have persuaded the non-Christian evolutionist that we have at least
given some serious thought to the issue, and that we are searching for the
truth. They would probably be all ears if we were to share what we have
discovered so far. For instance, think about those two poor mentally challenged young children who
recently were persuaded to become suicide bombers in
Evolution says we’re just
more intelligent animals than the others and are greatly influenced by our
genes. Well then, we
shouldn’t be surprised whenever we learn of another mother who has been
genetically predisposed to kill her new born baby. Mother cats and dogs do it
all the time with the runt of the litter, don’t they? If these kinds of
behavior have survived all these years and not been knocked off by natural
selection; on what grounds can anyone complain about “Mother Nature” only doing
her thing? If you think I’m being absurd, listen to the following
quotes from a recent outstanding book by Nancy Pearcey entitled: TOTAL TRUTH,
LIBERATING CHRISTIANITY from ITS CULTURAL CAPTIVITY.
“The reality is that
we haven’t a shred of evidence that morality in humans did or did not evolve by
natural selection,” says geneticist H. Allen Orr. Evolutionary psychologists
have constructed a host of hypothetical scenarios on questions like: What would
happen if we had a gene that said be nice to strangers? “But in the end, a
thought experiment is not an experiment,” Orr states acerbically. The reality
is we have no data.”[ii]
“We have to realize,
however, that once someone has accepted the evolutionary premise, the question
of evidence becomes all but irrelevant. Applying Darwinian explanations to
human behavior is a matter of simple logic. After all, if evolution is true,
than how else did the mind emerge, if not by evolution? How else did human
behavior arise, if not through
adaption to the environment?”
“This became clear a
few years ago when a book appeared offering an evolutionary account of sexual
assault. It was titled The Natural History of Rape:
Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion, and the authors were two
university professors who made the rather inflammatory claim that rape is not a pathology,
biologically speaking. Instead it is an evolutionary adaptation for
maximizing reproductive success. In other words, if candy and flowers don’t do
the trick, some men may resort to coercion to fulfill the reproductive
imperative. The book calls rape “a natural, biological phenomenon that is a
product of the human evolutionary heritage,” akin to “the leopard’s spots and
the giraffes elongated neck.”
“Demonstrating how
insulated many scientists are, the authors said they were genuinely surprised
by all the controversy the book caused. After all, to a Darwinist it is simple
logic that any behavior that survives today must have
conferred some evolutionary advantage-otherwise it would have been weeded out
by natural selection. So
the authors were virtually forced to identify some benefit even to the crime of
rape.”
“When one of the
authors, Randy Thornhill, appeared on National Public Radio, he found himself
deluged by angry calls, until finally he insisted that the logic is
inescapable; If evolution is true, then “every feature
of every living thing, including human beings, has an underlying evolutionary
background. That’s not a debatable matter.” Three times during
the program, he hammered home the same phrase: “It’s not a debatable matter.” This explains why opponents of
evolutionary psychology have failed to halt its rapid growth; many accept the
same evolutionary remise, which means ultimately they have no defense against
its application to human behavior. For example, critics of the rape
thesis tended to focus their argument at the level of details: Many victims of
rape are either too young or two old to bear children-and in some cases, are
even males (e.g., prison rape)-which clearly undercuts the idea that rape is
driven by a biological imperative to reproduce. The entire theory, said Nature, rests on “statistical sleight of
hand.” “Yet the critics were hamstrung by the fact that
most of them accept the same evolutionary assumptions of the book-which left
them no principled means of opposing its conclusion. To borrow an elegant
phrase from Tom Bethell, “The critics
were disarmed by their shared worldview.”
Romans
1:18-22 (AMP) 18 For God’s [holy] wrath and indignation are
revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who in
their wickedness repress and hinder the truth and make it
inoperative. 19 For
that which is known about God is
evident to them and made plain in their inner consciousness,
because God [Himself] has shown it to them.
20 For ever since the creation of the world His invisible
nature and attributes, that is, His eternal power and divinity, have
been made intelligible and clearly discernible in and through the things that have been
made (His handiworks). So [men] are without excuse [altogether without any
defense or justification], 21 Because when they knew and recognized Him as God,
they did not honor and glorify Him as God or give Him thanks. But instead they became futile and godless in their thinking [with
vain imaginings, foolish reasoning, and stupid speculations] and their
senseless minds were darkened. 22 Claiming to be wise, they became fools [professing
to be smart, they made simpletons of themselves].
Psalms 53:1 (ESV) 1The fool says in his heart, "There
is no God."
Proverbs 26:4-5 (NIV) 4 Do not answer a fool
according to his folly, or you will be like him yourself. 5 Answer a fool
according to his folly, or he will be wise in his own eyes.
We must keep the fool on the same page and force him or her to live
with their own foolishness, until they make themselves crazy and can’t stand it
anymore. Then, in complete prayerful dependence on the Lord for Him to add His
blessing to our efforts, and with an unmistakable sincere spirit of love and
humility, gently persuade the person to move over to another page, the first
one in the Bible, which starts by saying, “In the
beginning, GOD….” Lord willing, next week….”
[i] The Language of God, © 2006 by Francis S.
Collins, Free Press, A DIVISION of SIMON & SCHUSTER, 1230 Avenue of the
Americas, New York, N. Y. 10020, page 142.